NYC Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 map give me Cole$ stats for his first 2 years and let me know if he was a bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBlue Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Couple of points: First, Art, I read the thread on Gangreen and was very impressed with your posts. Truly, you not only have excellent insight into pro football but have the rare ability to express your views in a cogent, concise and easy-to-understand manner, even for Jets fans. What are you doing writing on this site rather than ESPN.com? Second, GaSkinsFan, my dog has more NFL insight than Sclereth or however you spell his name. That guy is a joke and seems to be the quintessential example of ESPN's encouragement for their analysts to take strong positions whether or not those positions have any basis in fact. I just basically tune out unless Mort or Jaws are speaking on those shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Everyone (except Cox and a few here) knows that WRs don't usually emerge until their 3rd season. Moss was out his first season and played what was essentially his first year last year. We'll see what he's got this year and the Jets will need him. It's also a nice added bonus that he's the best punt returner in the NFL, though that's not enough to justify first round status. And while everyone sings Coles praises, I was surprised nobody mentioned their head-to-head postseason stats last year. Coles - 65 total yards, 0 TD Moss - 139 total yards, 1 TD I'm not sure what it means, but it's worth noting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Perhaps it means that teams were so preoccupied with Coles that Moss was able to run free in the secondary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by NBlue Couple of points: First, Art, I read the thread on Gangreen and was very impressed with your posts. Truly, you not only have excellent insight into pro football but have the rare ability to express your views in a cogent, concise and easy-to-understand manner, even for Jets fans. What are you doing writing on this site rather than ESPN.com? Second, GaSkinsFan, my dog has more NFL insight than Sclereth or however you spell his name. That guy is a joke and seems to be the quintessential example of ESPN's encouragement for their analysts to take strong positions whether or not those positions have any basis in fact. I just basically tune out unless Mort or Jaws are speaking on those shows. Nblue, I aspire to underachieve. I'm highly successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBlue Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Flowtrain And while everyone sings Coles praises, I was surprised nobody mentioned their head-to-head postseason stats last year. Coles - 65 total yards, 0 TD Moss - 139 total yards, 1 TD I'm not sure what it means, but it's worth noting. I think its difficult not to conclude, based on the foregoing, that Moss is clearly, without doubt, the better receiver. The relative receiving yards of the two receivers in the two postseason games demonstrates conclusively that the Redskins made a major mistake in signing Coles and also proves that they severely overpaid to obtain him. Moreover, though it cannot be guaranteed beyond a shadow of a doubt, Moss' stats in those two playoff games basically ensure that he will have receiving yards of at least 1500 yards this year and start at the Pro Bowl opposite Wayne Chrebet. I agree. The statistic you cite is not only worth noting, but perhaps is the most important statistic ever noted comparing the relative values of two receivers and their likely future production. :bong: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Flowtrain Coles - 65 total yards, 0 TD Moss - 139 total yards, 1 TD I'm not sure what it means, but it's worth noting. Well it is harder to catch balls when you are covered by 2 people. Flow where did you get that info from?? Because the NFL lists this as his stats YD 87 TD 1 you can add 32 to rushing, oh let me guess you added return yds didn't you, you slick guy you Just start saying the words Peter Warrick :laugh: Or let me say who here do we skins know about some guy who had so much potential but was always injured......................... Westbrook comes to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYC Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Well it is harder to catch balls when you are covered by 2 people. or like in Oakland yuo simply decide not to show up at all in the biggest game of your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by NBlue I think its difficult not to conclude, based on the foregoing, that Moss is clearly, without doubt, the better receiver. The relative receiving yards of the two receivers in the two postseason games demonstrates conclusively that the Redskins made a major mistake in signing Coles and also proves that they severely overpaid to obtain him. Moreover, though it cannot be guaranteed beyond a shadow of a doubt, Moss' stats in those two playoff games basically ensure that he will have receiving yards of at least 1500 yards this year and start at the Pro Bowl opposite Wayne Chrebet. I agree. The statistic you cite is not only worth noting, but perhaps is the most important statistic ever noted comparing the relative values of two receivers and their likely future production. I think based on the foregoing, that you're a total ass whose inability to read words in a post, comprehend them, and extrapolate appropriate meaning is dwarfed only by the contrived and ineffective writing style that you hope will make you appear intelligent. Moreover, your misguided effort to lace a football post on a messageboard with aureate legalese in an impotent attempt at sarcasm has plainly demonstrated to all who are hereby witness that you are a dork of immense proportions. Notwithstanding the foregoing, please amend said writing style from this day forth so as to avoid future embarrassment. Originally posted by SonnyJ Perhaps it means that teams were so preoccupied with Coles that Moss was able to run free in the secondary? Maybe. Some might also expect a $13M WR to beat double-teams and outperform a #3WR bust in the most important games of the season. Just busting chops here - it's a noteworthy stat, but like I originally said I'm not sure what it means. Every now and then, we gotta look at the other side of the coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 So what you are saying Flow, is that essentially the Jets (and their fans) felt it was okay to not keep their WR who had a major breakout season because he didn't play like an all pro in the most important game of his life, to date, in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkeyBoy Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by NYC map give me Cole$ stats for his first 2 years and let me know if he was a bust. Well, considering Coles was a 3rd round pick and Moss was a first rounder expected to make a major impact... even if Coles was less successful it would make more sense. Still... 2000 New York Jets 13 3 22 370 16.8 63 1 1 2001 New York Jets 16 16 59 868 14.7 40 7 1 Coles had much better production than Moss did his first 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by The Evil Genius So what you are saying Flow, is that essentially the Jets (and their fans) felt it was okay to not keep their WR who had a major breakout season because he didn't play like an all pro in the most important game of his life, to date, in the NFL. What I'm saying is that Moss outperformed Coles in both playoff games. Whatever meaning you want to take from that statement, if any at all, is up to you as a Genius of all things that are Evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stricknine Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I would like to put in a request for the playful banter between NBlue and Flow to continue. Please! You two are cracking me up. I was laughing pretty hard at NBlue's post and Flow's response almost sent me to the floor. I'm lovin' it guys...don't stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I'm not going to concede yet that Moss is a bust but he most probably will be considered one if he doesn't do two things this year. 1. Stay healthy 2. Make people forget Coles (he'll probably need 60+ catches and close to, if not more than, 1000 yds. combined receiving and running.) Cox made some good points and some stupid points but it seemed to me he was speaking more from his heart than simply trying to talk intelligent football. Some of it came off as sour grapes but some of it was also so obvious that he couldn't help but be right. The keys to the Jets will be Curtis Martin and the O-Line (on a slightly lesser basis). Martin will have to run the ball effectively to keep the dogs off of Vinnie. The O-Line will have to run block effectively to help him do that. If Vinnie can avoid a lot of long yardage situations, he'll probably be fine. I don't think the defense will play as well as it did last year simply because it will be on the field more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 People believe what they want to believe regardless of facts. until people talk about what he has "DONE" instead of what he "COULD DO",.... he will compared more to Desmond Howard than Jerry Rice. The same goes with Ramsey. Until he goes out and has a few big games or a 3000 plus yard season, the press and non skin fans are going to label him a big "if" Jaws, Jackson, and Salisbury are about the only ex-players who tell it like it is, as fair as possible without some personal basis. Mort & sometimes Lenny P (though I hate to admit it), are pretty fair in their assessments. We will see Sept 4th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenaciousd Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 "We" better hope NOW that we don't lose to the Jets? Like we were hoping it before? Like it will be any worse now to lose a game? The "Spendskins". How clever. Makes a lot of sense considering its a cap league. You are a smart guy, NYC. I see how you earned your avatar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Flowtrain What I'm saying is that Moss outperformed Coles in both playoff games. Whatever meaning you want to take from that statement, if any at all, is up to you as a Genius of all things that are Evil. lets see as a WR that is what coles is: moss CT 5 YDS 42 CT 4 YDS 45 coles CT 4 YDS 36 CT 4 YDS 30 I don't see much difference in the stats. Coles was also covered by the best CB and most likely 2 of them. If you look at Chad's stats you don't know how many of the 26 passes he attempted were supposed to go to Coles??!! Something we will never find out. Chad CMP 19 ATT 25 YDS 222 CMP 21 ATT 47 YDS 183 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBlue Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by Flowtrain I think based on the foregoing, that you're a total ass whose inability to read words in a post, comprehend them, and extrapolate appropriate meaning is dwarfed only by the contrived and ineffective writing style that you hope will make you appear intelligent. Moreover, your misguided effort to lace a football post on a messageboard with aureate legalese in an impotent attempt at sarcasm has plainly demonstrated to all who are hereby witness that you are a dork of immense proportions. Notwithstanding the foregoing, please amend said writing style from this day forth so as to avoid future embarrassment. Dude, sorry my writing style was not what you were looking for in response to your very informative, relevant, post. I'll just ignore your rather sophomoric flame and try to write so that even you can understand my response. Here is your original post: Originally posted by Flowtrain And while everyone sings Coles praises, I was surprised nobody mentioned their head-to-head postseason stats last year. Coles - 65 total yards, 0 TD Moss - 139 total yards, 1 TD I'm not sure what it means, but it's worth noting. Worth noting? Worth noting I suppose in the same way that when I take a dump I, on occasion, will notice the size and general color of the fecal matter as it "flows" down the toilet. Though, then again, perhaps that is giving your statistics too much credit. I suppose you are trying to suggest that Moss may not be a bust because he "stepped up" in the playoffs whereas Coles failed to produce. But, of course, you are not quite willing to go there so you coyly note "i'm not sure what it means, but it's worth noting." Whatever. If you have a point, make it. If not, why are you trying to tell us its "notable." Oh, and let's not forget my favorite part of your post -- the actual statistical comparison. Against the Colts, Moss had 42 receiving yards to 36 for Coles. Against the Raiders, Moss had 45 receiving yards compared to 30 for Coles. That's right, a grand total of 21 more receiving yards over 2 games. But you don't stop there, you add in the return and rushing yards to pad Moss' stats and make him look like he had substantially better games than Coles. Did you think we wouldn't notice? Oh, and before you bother to respond that you accurately stated "total yards" in your post, please answer why the heck would it be notable that Moss had more return yards than Coles when Coles did not return a ball in either game. IF you want a notable statistic, I'd be happy to give you one and explain what it means. Last year Coles caught 97 passes for 1330. That means he is a damn good receiver with potential to be a great one. Last year Moss caught 39 catches for 520 yards. That means he was probably not as good a receiver as Coles was last year. Look, I understand the reason for your post. Certainly, the disparity of "total yards" between Coles and Moss in the playoffs last year is "worth noting" if one is a delusional Jets fan desperately attempting to cling to the slightest bit of hope that your team will not have a disasterous season after losing its top wideout to free agency and top QB for most of the season. Otherwise, its about as notable as $hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBlue Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 doggone it, you beat me to it jbooma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Flow, In your post you mention yards right? Well imagine how many yards Coles would have gotten if they knew how to use him and go deep. You see here in Washington that is what he is here for and if you have noticed he is averaging a hefty 25 yds per catch and it is only preseason. Before you keep trying to cover up the masterful brain of your GM and Coach. If you use the talents of the player to their potential, you might like what you had. Just watch the Skins this year, Coles will average at least 17 per catch, watch and learn :cool: You will still look at Moss's 9 yds per catch and think he is the man though :laugh: I forgot it will be Conway's 11 yds per catch that will replace coles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Originally posted by NBlue doggone it, you beat me to it jbooma. Its all good we are on the same team :cool: nice post though made me shed a tear. Flow must be an english teacher to attack your posting skills :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NBlue Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Originally posted by jbooma Its all good we are on the same team Indeed, and I'm not particularly surprised Flow did even attempt to defend himself once his spin masquerading as facts was exposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsanity56 Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Originally posted by jbooma I agree he has some flahes but for some reason I can't get the name Warrick out of my mind --------------------------------------- Couldn't agree more with ya JB.and to think we could have both on our team if things had gone differently(shudder)... good to see cox being honest about his former employer.honestly he was a parcells not jets boy anyways.. he was definitely right about the Oline too.look how it failed them already...lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Originally posted by NBlue Indeed, and I'm not particularly surprised Flow did even attempt to defend himself once his spin masquerading as facts was exposed. I think he is waiting for to moss has a 100 game to get back to us, maybe sometime next this year when Wayne and Conway are both out. (40 yds of it will be return yds though, hehe) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Originally posted by NBlue Indeed, and I'm not particularly surprised Flow did even attempt to defend himself once his spin masquerading as facts was exposed. Pardon me. I didn't realize there was anything to defend. I simply posted some stats and you struggled to put words into my mouth regarding the meaning of these stats -- meaning that I never asserted in the first place. Then you ask me to defend what you thought I suggested when I never suggested anything of the sort. First of all let's clarify the numbers because they weren't intended to include return yards, though I admit a 20 yard typo on my part is completely to blame for the misinterpretation. The correct numbers are as follows: Moss - 119 total yards and 1 TD Coles - 65 total yards and 0 TD Now, I'm not sure why reverses and the like should be exluded from a WR comparison, especially since Moss's versatility was one of the main reasons he was drafted as first rounder. Second, for those who are unaware, there's a fine distinction between a lateral pass that is ruled a run v. a forward screen pass ruled a reception. Hackett loves to throw the screen/lateral as it's been very successful in the Jets offense. While this arbitrary distinction is consequential only to some Redskins fans and those employed by the Elias Sports Bureau, I can assure you it's of no consequence to the DB who gets burned on the play. That's why I included two plays technically ruled a run by Moss and on play ruled a run by Coles. I'm also forced to wonder if I'm the only one who finds it at all hypocritical that my friend booma thinks it's perfectly acceptable to find great meaning in Coles YPC numbers notched during 3 meaningless preseason games, but it's unacceptable to even note (without drawing any conclusion) Moss or Coles's stats during the most important games of their professional careers. Let's be consistent. In the end, I take nothing away from Coles' playoff performance - he had a fine season that, in my mind, was not tarnished by his playoff disappearance. What I saw from Moss in the playoffs, however, was a continuation of improved play that he exhibited in the last couple games of the season. 3 TDs in his last 4 games - that catches my attention. When you look at young developing WRs, you hope to see improvement, especially in their route-running and ability to find the endzone. While it's amusing to watch you grasp for far-fetched significance that you claimed I was pinning to the stats, the only significance to me is what I stated above. Late in the season, Moss demonstrated that he may finally be playing instead of thinking. The fact that in so doing, he managed to outplay Coles in the playoffs has a certain degree of irony in the context of this message board for obvious reasons. We can note Moss's improvement and note the irony. That's all. But since irony is a subtle thing, it's not surprising that it would go unnoticed by you and would be mistaken for your own excrement as you indicate in your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.